Author
Topic: 5D Mark III/X Information [CR1] (Read 56260 times)

I'd buy a 22MP 5D-family camera with pro-AF and 6.9 FPS in a heartbeat. It's exactly what we dreamed the 5D Mark II could have been in an ideal world. at the end of the day, 22 MP is a decent all-around useful number, although I'd prefer a push to 24 MP or 28 MP (even if that brought shooting speed down fractionally to 6.3 FPS to match the former 50D). can't wait for this to drop, even though I'll be shooting my 5D Mark II until the shutter dies before I upgrade.

I don't think the few comparisons that have been made can reach that conclusion. IMO the nikon is about a half stop over the 1DX simply because of the larget photosites, but you need to keep in mind that comparing jpgs is a futile thing to do when they aren't even the same subject and light. Once somebody like DXO/ dpreview or other lab tests raws we will know for sure. However, as I said, I expect the lower MP nikon to fair better. However, the difference will certainly be smaller than with the past generation.

I'm not sure about that. Why would Canon give the 1DX a native range up until 51,200 where the D4 is limited to 12,800 (not talking about digital boost, they reach the same)? I don't think Canon would do that unless they're pretty sure they can at least match the performance, not to say surpass it by 2 stops...

I don't think that's what he is saying at all. He is simply saying exactly what every other camera company is saying: if we think there is demand for it, we'll make one.

<snip>

First of all, corporate guys talk like that. It's their job even if they have nothing in the drawing board.

Though I can't cite particular instances (Neuro, is your index handy?) I believe Canon execs have, in the past, made very different statements when they didn't have a direct competitor. I believe (going by memory) they have said things such as "we don't believe there's a market for X" when they haven't had a competitor ready. I have to agree with CR Guy: I think that was a clear signal that Canon is ready to produce as soon as they've finished assessing the D800 and the market.

All the same specs are coming in. 22mp, 61pt af, 6.9fps. It could definitely take the spot of the 7D, if the previous rumor is true.

Sorry - wrong. When I'm focal-length or magnification limited, I want pixel density, not pixel count. At 22MP, it could replace the 20D, but it would need 46MP to replace the 7D and, frankly, I want more pixel density than that, not less. This is why it either needs to be really high in pixel count or they need a 7D replacement too, preferably above 22MP.

I've done my share of D800 humping lately, but a 22 mp 5DIII with a 61-point AF system and 6.9 FPS would be one heck of a camera. Throw in one or two additional stops of DR and ISO over the 5DII, and this sucker will be irresistible. Do it, Canon My Canon glass gives me wood every time I use them, and I really don't want to switch systems.

The interesting thing about a 22MP 5DIII is that once again the budget full frame is divided by two completely opposite camera models that essentially swapped places compared to the last generation. Nikon is now big MP game and a landscape/studio dream, canon is now fast fps game which should keep a lot of action/sports guys happy.

The funny part is that despite the role reversals, both the Canon and Nikon fan boys are still waving their Canon and Nikon flags. If you're a Nikon fan boy that loved the D700, and gladly sacrificed resolution for FPS and ISO, it would seem odd to embrace the D800, but they do anyways. If you're a Canon fan boy that went poo poo on speed in favor of resolution, it would seem odd to embrace a 22 mp 5DIII with vastly improved AF and FPS, but they will anyways.

Picsfor

All Canon using pro's are feeling rather smug about the 1DX when compared to the D4.

where did you get that idea/info?

Simple - where have you had Nikon pros jumping for joy with the D4? Heck Joe Mcnally's launch blurb produced nothing that any one could get excited about.Most with D3s's for weddings etc. are not even bothering to upgrade!

Canon guys on the other hand have got a camera that comfortably claims the Pro model crown. Which part of the 1DX improvements are not beneficial? 61pt AF? ISO to 51k? 12FPS? Gbit Ethernet? Dual CF? Duplication of controls for portrait and landscape mode? Video improvements?

The only issue is the moving from APS-H to FF, and for most users that will end up becoming a minor adjustment in real world terms.

I don't think the few comparisons that have been made can reach that conclusion. IMO the nikon is about a half stop over the 1DX simply because of the larget photosites, but you need to keep in mind that comparing jpgs is a futile thing to do when they aren't even the same subject and light. Once somebody like DXO/ dpreview or other lab tests raws we will know for sure. However, as I said, I expect the lower MP nikon to fair better. However, the difference will certainly be smaller than with the past generation.

I'm not sure about that. Why would Canon give the 1DX a native range up until 51,200 where the D4 is limited to 12,800 (not talking about digital boost, they reach the same)? I don't think Canon would do that unless they're pretty sure they can at least match the performance, not to say surpass it by 2 stops...

I don't think mere ISO values in a marketing brouchure tell anything. the proof will be in the raws. who's to say canon isn't just boosting too and they decided to market it as non boosted? How would we know? At the end of the day the proof will be in proper comparisons which is all that matters. Maybe Canon will be on top? not sure, , but not by much if so. certainly nowhere near 2 stops. But I'm highly skeptical... I've never shot with either but those fortunare enough to have gotten the D4 swear it is better than the D3s at low light.

Quote

Something that Canon should do to jump way ahead of Nikon in the Video world is to have 8 bit 4:2:2 in camera compression. Being a Nikon user, I would get a new 5D ? for video use

I think the video market will move to much higher end bodies. the days of the 5D as a primary video tool in the high end markets are numbered with things like the red and the canon c300 among competition from sony.

Those that expect large ISO improvements in RAW files are in for disappointment. From market reasons it must be less good than 1Dx, and the 18 megapixel 1Dx may be as good as the 12 megapixel D3s in RAW performance. The D3s is about 1 stop better than 5Dmk2 (plus it can do very high ISOs which 5Dmk2 can't).

I'd say that a realistic expectation is that a 22 megapixel 5Dmk3 sensor is about 0,5 stop better than 5Dmk2 up to ISO6400, plus that the ultra high ISOs (ISO12800+) is more useful than on 5Dmk2.

maxxevv

The first reports says that 1DX and D800 will have about the same high ISO performance, D800 is better than D700/D3 and 5Dmk2 att all ISO:s and that D4 is about 0.5 stop better than D800 and 1Dx.

Guess we will have to wait for final confirmation but it's sounds likely.If this is correct then one might wonder what Canon will do with 5D3 to compete. Perhaps it will beat the 1Dx by 0.5 stop at high ISO?

Tijn

The first reports says that 1DX and D800 will have about the same high ISO performance, D800 is better than D700/D3 and 5Dmk2 att all ISO:s and that D4 is about 0.5 stop better than D800 and 1Dx.

Guess we will have to wait for final confirmation but it's sounds likely.If this is correct then one might wonder what Canon will do with 5D3 to compete. Perhaps it will beat the 1Dx by 0.5 stop at high ISO?

Wait, you're saying you seriously think that the 5D mk3 will outperform the 1Dx on ISO performance and resolution, while costing over two times less?

Continuing that line I'd love to see the next 650D do 1,5 stops better than the 1D X on ISO performance at 26MPx, costing 750eu...

The first reports says that 1DX and D800 will have about the same high ISO performance, D800 is better than D700/D3 and 5Dmk2 att all ISO:s and that D4 is about 0.5 stop better than D800 and 1Dx.

Guess we will have to wait for final confirmation but it's sounds likely.If this is correct then one might wonder what Canon will do with 5D3 to compete. Perhaps it will beat the 1Dx by 0.5 stop at high ISO?

Well, define compete. IMO competitive doesn't need to mean undisputed best at everything. There is no such thing from any manufacturer, and if so, it never lasts long. I think even if they don't beat the D4 in high ISO, half a stop is barrely the difference between competing and not competing. I think the 1DX combined with the canon lens system is extremelly competitive and has a few better areas compared to the D4. Likewise the 5DIII is a great competitor offering many distinct features over the competition even if it falls in others. Then there is price. The 1DX/D4 are great but price wise they are absurd. The 5DIII can easlily compete against them by thousands of dollars less.

Quote

Hate to break it to you, Tuggen, but you are simply wrong. What reports are you hearing? And there is absolutely no chance that the D800 beats the 1DX in high iso performance